Why does the rest of the world hate America

[ksslemp]

I used to Hate you Stopper! But i've been advised by my Doctor to think you're OK!

[Blitzkreig]

I dont mind if folks want to point that the war was fought over false information, thats fair game. Its the people that say it was a lie that piss me off. "bush lied and people died " is bullshit. Anybody that says that it was known Saddam didnt have WMDs and Bush just lied about it for the war is full of baloney. Everybody and their mother thought Saddam had them. Every single reliable intelligence agency here and abroad said he had them, including the Russians, Germans, and British. He had used them to kill off thousands of Kurds in Iraq and had never proven that he had disposed of his stockpile and in fact evaded every effort to help him prove he was weapon-free. What he did was bluff that he did have them so he could seem stronger in the region and his bluff got called. Any reasonable person would have believed, given the available info, that Saddam had those weapons and was fully capable of using them.

No, I don't agree at all. Lots of people at the time suspected he had bugger all, including Scott Ritter and Hans Blix. The world and his wife knew in the run-up to the war in late 2002 that the whole WMD thing was simply a pretext for the US in the UN to invade, and that it didn't really matter to the US whether it was true or not. They were going to invade regardless of whether WMD were ever found or even existed.

UNSCOM *always* said that the sanctions after the Kuwait war had been very effective as far as nuclear and chemical materials were concerned (even if not for other things).

In the end, the US and Britain invaded anyway - they didn't wait for the UN to complete their inspections, and they never got a valid resolution to invade Iraq (1664 didn't allow it.)

What bothered me at the time was the attitude of the British (and US) media at the time. Almost no newspaper or TV outlet ever seriously questioned the US's claims, nor did they ever seriously question those people who could give a contrary view (like Ritter and Blix). But they sure as hell banged on about those ridiculous "yellow cake from Nigeria" claims, the "45 minutes" claims, and Colin Powell's pitiful presentation at the UN.

I don't believe the WMD claim was a mistake, I think it was a big lie, and 2002 was a powerful demonstration of how our "free" media will just go along with the government and not seriously question them when it matters. I wonder what the next big lie will be.

WHAT? The sanctions were not at all effective. According to UNICEF, more than 500 thousand people died, mostly children, because the sanctions were so restrictive. "The reasons include lack of medical supplies, malnutrition, and especially disease owing to lack of clean water. Among other things, chlorine, needed for disinfecting water supplies, was banned as having a "dual use" in potential weapons manufacture." (Encyclopedia)

So, no, the sanctions didn't work and we needed to take a different course.

[Stopper]

<Lots of incisive political commentary, even if I say so myself>

UNSCOM *always* said that the sanctions after the Kuwait war had been very effective as far as nuclear and chemical materials were concerned (even if not for other things).

WHAT? The sanctions were not at all effective. According to UNICEF, more than 500 thousand people died, mostly children, because the sanctions were so restrictive. "The reasons include lack of medical supplies, malnutrition, and especially disease owing to lack of clean water. Among other things, chlorine, needed for disinfecting water supplies, was banned as having a "dual use" in potential weapons manufacture." (Encyclopedia)

So, no, the sanctions didn't work and we needed to take a different course.

Note where I bolded - I didn't mean to dismiss the thousands of people who died in such a manner - but how the sanctions worked in regard to medical supplies is a different topic...I was talking specifically about the case for WMD's in the run-up to the war...

[cowshrptrn]

The main problem with our environmental laws is that companies find it cheaper to apy the fines, rather than actually dispose of their garbage properly. If we had a form of point system, and revoked corporate charters for failure to comply we wouldn't have this problem at all!

[Econ2000]

U can easily see this: the US doesnt care about any other country truly in their heart

[ksslemp]

NOT TRUE!

[P Gizzle]

why are we always backing up Israel?

[Jargo The Axe]

I havn't bothered to read all of the previous 19 pages so if these are already stated ignore.

People hate America because we are on top as far as military. It is natural to hate anyone stronger than you. Also we are involved heavily in the Middle East. Now think about real hard; who started it there?

[P Gizzle]

oooohhhh, pick me, pick me!!!!


is it, uh Europe???

[Stopper]

I havn't bothered to read all of the previous 19 pages so if these are already stated ignore.

People hate America because we are on top as far as military. It is natural to hate anyone stronger than you. Also we are involved heavily in the Middle East. Now think about real hard; who started it there?

How far back are you going? The Islamic Empire? The Turks? Britain? Germany? France? Britain? America? I give up. All I'm sure is, nobody leaves the people there in peace...

[P Gizzle]

go back to first crusade

[ksslemp]

Okay! You got me. I did it!

[P Gizzle]

how dare u ksslemp?!! you started the crusades?!!!

[ksslemp]

NO! I shot the Sheriff, but i didn't kill the Deputy!

[P Gizzle]

lol

[Jargo The Axe]

About my last topic US involvement started with the rise of terrorism including Desert Storm. But the actual origins of the fighting dates back to around 2,050 b.c.


Any questions on this? ask and I'll try to answer.

[Stopper]

About my last topic US involvement started with the rise of terrorism including Desert Storm. But the actual origins of the fighting dates back to around 2,050 b.c.


Any questions on this? ask and I'll try to answer.

I've three:

a) Where on Earth did you get the idea that US involvement started with the rise of terrorism?

b) What does terrorism have to do with Desert Storm?

c) If ksslemp didn't kill the deputy, who DID?

[Jargo The Axe]

A) i answer with a question to you, where do you think it started?

B) what do you call Sadam Hussein?

C) I don't know

[Stopper]

Well I'm slightly annoyed my questions haven't been properly answered, but here goes:

a) There's a long, long history which I don't even dare to claim full knowledge even of, but this (really long) 1991 essay by a US libertarian (not my cup of tea) think-tank may give some pointers:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

I haven't read it all myself, but I notice Nasser and the Shah of Iran are mentioned in there, and they date back to, like, the NINETEEN-FIFTIES!

b) I certainly DO think Saddam Hussein is a kind of terrorist, but you knew full well you were implying the non-state kind, Osama Bin Laden, PLO, that sort of thing, didn't you? THAT has little to do with the Kuwait war!

c) Well I don't know either, but it definitely wasn't Eric Clapton, because he sang so.

[Jargo The Axe]

A) Good point

B) Sorry I'm not an expert

C) Oh well....

Oh ya I never promised to give correct answer I said I'd try.


p.s. What would "properly answered" be?

[vtmarik]

A) i answer with a question to you, where do you think it started?

Long long ago. Al-Hassan Ibn-al-Sabbah. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Hassan_ibn-al-Sabbah

TOBY
[sighs] I-I know it's not new. I know in the eleventh century... I'm gonna have trouble
pronouncing this, in the eleventh century, [sighs] secret followers of Al-hassan Ibn-al-Sabbah,
who were taught to believe in nothing and dare all, carried out these very swift and very
treacherous murders of fellow Muslims, and they did it in the state of religious ecstasy.

[...]

TOBY [cont.]
As a matter of fact, young men between 12 and 20 were given hashish, and uh, smuggled into a...
I really don't know what they call it, they were smuggled into a kind of specially designed
pleasure garden complete with concubines. They were told this was paradise, and that the
Master's Angels would carry them back if they carried out murders of the Master's enemies.

We know them today by their Arabic name: assassins.

B) what do you call Sadam Hussein?

A franco-esque dictator with Stalin-ish features. He wasn't a terrorist any more than Hitler or Mussolini were terrorists. Hussein was a good, old fashioned despot. One of the last despots of our age.

[Stopper]

A) Good point

B) Sorry I'm not an expert

C) Oh well....

Oh ya I never promised to give correct answer I said I'd try.


p.s. What would "properly answered" be?

Never mind, you did your best...as to a proper answer, that'd be not answering with a question!

[Stopper]

A ... dictator with Stalin-ish features.

You mean his moustache? Or should I say, 'Stache.

[Jargo The Axe]

OK Stopper fair enough. If you knew my real age you'd know why I can't answer you completely. An about Hitler not being a terrorist, what is your definition of the word "terrorist"? I'm talking to vtmarik.

[vtmarik]

OK Stopper fair enough. If you knew my real age you'd know why I can't answer you completely. An about Hitler not being a terrorist, what is your definition of the word "terrorist"? I'm talking to vtmarik.

When I hear the word terrorist, I think of a non-centralized cell of people that may or may not follow the edicts a 'leader' that commits acts of violence for the express purpose of changing the policies of government(s) through fear and coercion. Direct Action taken to its most extreme form.

Hitler was a fascist. He was the head of a nation, formed an army that was fiercely loyal to him, and attempted to make the whole world part of Germany. He didn't try to change minds, he tried to take minds. It wasn't about coercion, it wasn't "Do this or we'll blow you up."

It was more along the lines of attacking, invading, and marching past saying "Welcome to the new German Empire!" Conquering was his game, not coercion.